IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Scenario:
$ vgs -o+vg_mda_copies
VG #PV #LV #SN Attr VSize VFree #VMdaCps
fedora 1 2 0 wz--n- 9.51g 0 unmanaged
vg 16 9 0 wz--n- 1.94g 1.83g 2
$ lvs -o+read_ahead vg/lvol6 vg/lvol7
LV VG Attr LSize Pool Origin Data% Rahead
lvol6 vg Vwi-a-tz-- 1.00g pool lvol5 0.00 auto
lvol7 vg Vwi---tz-k 1.00g pool lvol6 256.00k
Before this patch:
$vgs -o vg_name,vg_mda_copies -S 'vg_mda_copies < unmanaged'
VG #VMdaCps
vg 2
Problem:
Reserved values can be only used with exact match = or !=, not <,<=,>,>=.
In the example above, the "unamanaged" is internally represented as
18446744073709551615, but this should be ignored while not comparing
field directly with "unmanaged" reserved name with = or !=. Users
should not be aware of this internal mapping of the reserved value
name to its internal value and hence it doesn't make sense for such
reserved value to take place in results of <,<=,> and >=.
There's no order defined for reserved values!!! It's a special
*reserved* value that is taken out of the usual value range
of that type.
This is very similar to what we have already fixed with
2f7f6932dc, but it's the other way round
now - we're using reserved value name in selection criteria now
(in the patch 2f7f693, we had concrete value and we compared it
with the reserved value). So this patch completes patch 2f7f693.
This patch also fixes this problem:
$ lvs -o+read_ahead vg/lvol6 vg/lvol7 -S 'read_ahead > 32k'
LV VG Attr LSize Pool Origin Data% Rahead
lvol6 vg Vwi-a-tz-- 1.00g pool lvol5 0.00 auto
lvol7 vg Vwi---tz-k 1.00g pool lvol6 256.00k
Problem:
In the example above, the internal reserved value "auto" is in the
range of selection "> 32k" - it shouldn't match as well. Here the
"auto" is internally represented as MAX_DBL and of course, numerically,
MAX_DBL > 256k. But for users, the reserved value should be uncomparable
to any number so the mapping of the reserved value name to its interna
value is transparent to users. Again, there's no order defined for
reserved values and hence it should never match if using <,<=,>,>=
operators.
This is actually exactly the same problem as already described in
2f7f6932dc, but that patch failed for
size field types because of incorrect internal representation used.
With this patch applied, both problematic scenarios mentioned
above are fixed now:
$ vgs -o vg_name,vg_mda_copies -S 'vg_mda_copies < unmanaged'
(blank)
$ lvs -o+read_ahead vg/lvol6 vg/lvol7 -S 'read_ahead > 32k'
LV VG Attr LSize Pool Origin Rahead
lvol7 vg Vwi---tz-k 1.00g pool lvol6 256.00k
The new dm_report_object_is_selected fn makes it possible to opt whether the
object reported should be displayed on output or not. Also, in addition to
that, it makes it possible to save the result of selection (either 0 or 1).
So dm_report_object_is_selected is simply more general form of object
reporting fn - combinations now allow for:
dm_report_object_is_selected(rh, object, 1, NULL):
This is exactly the original dm_report_object fn and it's fully equal
to it.
dm_report_object_is_selected(rh, object, 0, selected):
Do not display the result on output, but save info whether the object
is selected or not in 'selected' variable.
dm_report_object_is_selected(rh, object, 1, selected):
Display the result on output (if it passes selection criteria) and save
whether the object is selected or not in 'selected' variable.
dm_report_object(rh, object, 0, NULL):
This combination is not allowed - it will end up with internal error.
We're either interested in selection status or we want to display the
result on output or both, but never nothing of the two.
Support error_if_no_space feature for thin pools.
Report more info about thinpool status:
(out_of_data (D), metadata_read_only (M), failed (F) also as health
attribute.)
Add new dm_report_compact_fields function to cause report outout
(dm_report_output) to ignore fields which don't have any value set
in any of the rows reported. This provides support for compact report
output where only fields which have something to report are displayed.
The dm_report_set_output_selection was not implemented in the end -
we have dm_report_init_with_selection instead. This is just a remnant
from development code that got into libdevmapper.h by mistake.
Support new PASSTHROUGH 'feature' flag.
Add dm_config_node to pass in policy args.
Really use origin_uuid instead of using extra call
to pass seg_areas.
Switch to 64bit feature flag bit set so there is
enough space in future for new bits...
When transaction_id is set 0 for thin-pool, libdm avoids validation
of thin-pool, unless there are real messages to be send to thin-pool.
This relaxes strict policy which always required to know
in front transaction_id for the kernel target.
It now allows to activate thin-pool with any transaction_id
(when transaction_id is passed in)
It is now upto application to validate transaction_id from life
thin-pool volume with transaction_id within it's own metadata.
Some values are reserved for special purpose like 'undefined', 'unmanaged' etc.
When using >, <, >= and < comparison operators where the range is considered,
do not include reserved values as proper values in this range which
would otherwise result in not so obvious criteria match (as the reserved value is
actually transparent for the user). It's incorrect.
Example scenario:
$ vgs -o vg_name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2
VG #VMdaCps
vg1 1
vg2 unmanaged
The "unmanaged" is actually mapped onto reserved value
18446744073709551615 (2^64 - 1) internally.
Such reseved value is already caught on selection criteria input
properly:
$ vgs -o name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2 -S 'vg_mda_copies=18446744073709551615'
Numeric value 18446744073709551615 found in selection is reserved.
However, we still need to fix situaton where the reserved value may be
included in resulting range:
Before this patch:
$ vgs -o vg_name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2 -S 'vg_mda_copies >= 1'
VG #VMdaCps
vg1 1
vg2 unmanaged
With this patch applied:
$ vgs -o vg_name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2 -S 'vg_mda_copies >= 1'
VG #VMdaCps
vg1 1
From the examples above, we can see that without this patch applied,
the vg_mda_copies >= 1 also matched the reserved value 18446744073709551615
(which is represented by the "unamanged" string on report). When
applying the operators, such values must be skipped! They're meant to
be matched only against their string representation only, e.g.:
$ vgs -o name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2 -S 'vg_mda_copies=unmanaged'
VG #VMdaCps
vg2 unmanaged
...or any synonyms:
$ vgs -o name,vg_mda_copies vg1 vg2 -S 'vg_mda_copies=undefined'
VG #VMdaCps
vg2 unmanaged
This is probably better approach than 3880ca5eca.
If dm module is not loaded during dm_is_dm_major call, there are no
lines for dm in /proc/devices, of course. Normally, dm_is_dm_major
is called to check existing devices, hence if module is not loaded,
we can expect there's no DM device present at the same time so we
can directly return 0 here (meaning the major number being inspected
is not dm device's one).
See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059711.
For dm_is_dm_major to determine whether the major number given as
an argument belongs to a DM device, libdm code needs to know what
the actual DM major is to do the comparison.
It may happen that the dm-mod module is not loaded during this
call and so for the completness let's try our best before we start
giving various errors - we can still make use of dm-mod autoloading,
though only since kernels 2.6.36 where this feature was introduced.
Add extra safety detection for thin pool transaction id
and query pool status after confirmed message.
In case there is a missmatch, immeditelly abort further
processing.
This patch adds a new flag --deferred to dmsetup remove. If this flag is
specified and the device is open, it is scheduled to be deleted on
close.
struct dm_info is extended.
The existing dm_task_get_info() is converted into a wrapper around the
new version dm_task_get_info_with_deferred_remove() so existing binaries
can still use the old smaller structure.
Recompiled code will pick up the new larger structure.
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Using "[ ]" operator together with "&&" (or ",") inside causes the
string list to be matched if and only if all the items given match
the value reported and the number of items also match. This is
strict list matching and the original behaviour we already have.
In contrast to that, the new "{ }" operator together with "&&" inside
causes the string list to be matched if and only if all the items given
match the value reported but the number of items don't need to match.
So we can provide a subset in selection criteria and if the subset
is found, it matches.
For example:
$ lvs -o name,tags
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
lvol1 a,b
lvol2 b,c,x
lvol3 a,b,y
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags=[a,b]'
LV LV Tags
lvol1 a,b
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags={a,b}'
LV LV Tags
lvol1 a,b
lvol3 a,b,y
So in the example above the a,b is subset of a,b,y and therefore
it also matches.
Clearly, when using "||" (or "#") inside, the { } and [ ] is the
same:
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags=[a#b]'
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
lvol1 a,b
lvol2 b,c,x
lvol3 a,b,y
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags={a#b}'
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
lvol1 a,b
lvol2 b,c,x
lvol3 a,b,y
Also in addition to the above feature, fix list with single value
matching when using [ ]:
Before this patch:
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags=[a]'
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
lvol1 a,b
lvol3 a,b,y
With this patch applied:
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags=[a]'
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
In case neither [] or {} is used, assume {} (the behaviour is not
changed here):
$ lvs -o name,tags -S 'tags=a'
LV LV Tags
lvol0 a
lvol1 a,b
lvol3 a,b,y
So in new terms 'tags=a' is equal to 'tags={a}'.
